9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. [ 2017 (11) TMI 553 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ], wherein this Tribunal has held that Revenue cannot file appeal against the order of the Commissioner issued under CHALR, 2004. The appeal is not maintainable against the impugned order before this Tribunal - Appeal dismissed. - Customs Stay Application No.50115 of 2019 In Customs Appeal No. 50312 of 2019 [DB/SM] - Final Order No. 50625/2019 - Dated:- 3-5-2019 - MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. C.L. MAHAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Awnod Singh, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Ashok Jindal, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER ASHOK JINDAL: Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the proceedings against the respondent has been dropped by the Commissioner of Customs under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 alongwith an application for stay of operation of the impugned order. 2. The ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent took the preliminary objection that the appeal is not maintainable against the proceedings dropped by the Commissioner of Customs in the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e vs. Regional Director, National Counsel for Teacher Education in Civil Appeal No.1068/2003 vide judgement dated 07.02.2003 to say that regulations made under power conferred by statute are supporting legislation and have the force and effect if validly made. Therefore, he submits that the objection raised by ld. Counsel for the respondent is to be turned down. 5. Heard the parties. 6. On preliminary objection raised by the ld. Counsel for the respondent and examined the issue, which is as follows:- Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act against the Order of Commissioner of Customs passed under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations or not? 7. The main thrust of the ld. AR is on the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in St. Johns Teachers Training Institute (Supra), wherein he relied on the observations made by the Hon ble Apex Court as under:- Rules and Regulations are all comprised in delegated legislations. The power to make subordinate legislation is derived from the enabling Act and it is fundamental that the delegate on whom such a power i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the State Government does not take into consideration the relevant factors enumerated in Sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act and the guidelines issued by the Council or takes into consideration factors which are not relevant and rejects the application for grant of a NOC, it will be open to the institution concerned to challenge the same in accordance with law. But, that by itself, cannot be a ground to hold that the Regulations which require a NOC from the State Government or the Union Territory are ultra vires or invalid. 7.2 Further, we have gone through the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, which is extracted herein below:- 21. Appeal by Customs Broker.- A Customs Broker, who is aggrieved by any order passed by the Commissioner of Customs under these regulations, may prefer an appeal under section 129A of the Act to the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal established under sub-section (1) of section 129 of the Act. 7.3 We further take note of the fact that these Regulations have been framed in terms of Section 146 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The said provision is extracted below:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibunal as well as High Court in various decisions reported : CC (General), Mumbai vs. JAC Enterprises 2016 (334) E.L.T. 89 (Tri. Mumbai), CC, Mumbai vs. Impex Clearing Shipping Agency 2003 (161) E.L.T. 483 (Tri. Mumbai) and A.S. Vasan Sons vs. Union of India 2009 (238) E.L.T. 217 (Bom.), held that the CHALR, 2004 being a self-contained code specifically provided for appeal by the CHA when aggrieved by the order of the Licensing Authority. Admittedly, it did not provide for an appellate remedy to the Revenue. The submission of the learned AR is that this order have been issued by the Adjudicating Authority in terms of CHALR, 2004 which is framed under Customs Act, 1962. Hence, the same should be appealable in terms of Section 129A. He referred to the Larger Bench decision in Gaurav Pharma Ltd. (supra). In the said decision, the Tribunal was examining the maintainability of appeal against order for provisional release of seized goods under Section 110A of the Act. The Tribunal held that an order or a decision by the Adjudicating Authority shall be appealable in terms of Section 129A to the Tribunal. The submission of the Revenue is that CHALR, 2004 having been framed un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
